Collocation in Modern Standard Arabic

Collocation in Modern Standard Arabic revisited
Author(s): Paula Santillán Grimm

Source: Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik, No. 51 (2009), pp. 22-41
Published by: Harrassowitz Verlag
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43525856
Accessed: 11-01-2018 12:40 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Harrassowitz Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik
This content downloaded from 213.181.234.168 on Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:40:27 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Collocation in Modern Standard Arabic revisited*
Paula Santillan Grimm1
1. Introduction
Over the last two decades there has been a great deal of interest in lexical
studies, particularly in the combinatorics of words in natural languages.
Conventionalized forms, frames, routine formulae, idioms, and collocations
have proved to be chiefly appealing in the areas of phraseology, lexico-
graphy, stylistics and applied linguistics. In the field of Arabic linguistics,
proverbs, idioms and compounds have taken the lion's share of researching,
while collocations have been dealt with in a rather intermittent and modest
way. Moreover, scholars have devoted most of their research to applied
areas of collocational investigation, being lexicography (Abu-Ssaydeh 1989,
1991a, 1995, forthcoming; Hoogland 1993; Heliel 1994; Hafiz 2002, 2004)
and translation (Heliel 1989; Ghazala 1993a, 1993b; Shakir and Farghal
1992; Abu-Ssaydeh 2001; Al-Rawi 2001; Al-Brashi 2005; Bahumaid 2006) the
two most prolific fields.2 What surprises us most is the limited amount of
research on collocations that has been conducted within Arabic lexicology,
let alone phraseology. In addition, "the relatively few modern studies on
collocation attempted by Arab researchers tend to utilize the conceptual
framework developed in English lexical studies" (Bahumaid 2006: 137),
which renders less feasible their applicability for investigating collocations
in this Semitic language.
This paper is set to contribute to the development of a more comprehen-
sive Arab notion of collocation. We aim at approaching the collocational
phenomenon in Modern Standard Arabic from a phraseological perspective,
1 Department of Semitic Studies, University of Granada, Spain.

2 For a recent review of the literature on collocations in Arabic see El-Gemei
(2006).
* This paper has been carried out thanks to a research doctoral scholarship granted
to the author by the Agenda Española de Cooperación Internacional (Spanish
Ministry of Foreign Affairs).
Collocation in Modern Standard Arabic revisited 23
bearing in mind two basic goals: first, describin

semantic features, which will help to come out w
the concept; and, second, putting forward an in
tions in MSA, whilst bringing to surface the mo
and behaviour of each category.
2. What a collocation is and what it is not
For some linguists, collocations have become a highly controversial phen-

omenon, as the boundaries between them and other multi-word lexical
items do not always happen to be clear-cut. Nowadays, the term 'colloca-
tion' is used to name quite heterogeneous linguistic phenomena, ranging
from loosely fixed expressions Caģrā dirāsa) to routines (calā kull hai ) and
sayings (ļā hawla wa-lã quwwata > ilia bi-l-lah ). This confusion is, in fact,
pertinent to all fixed expressions; according to Moon (1998: 2), "[different
terms are sometimes used to describe identical or very similar kinds of unit;
at the same time, a single term may be used to denote very different
phenomena". However, as Zuluaga (2002: 99) claims, graduality in language
should not represent an insurmountable obstacle to define the categories
and concepts of analysis. In fact, whatever variation may occur within
transitional phases, it is well-defined categories which prevail.
From a phraseological perspective, collocations border on free combina-
tions, on the one hand, and on compounds and idioms, on the other. As
above mentioned, these four types of combinations should be conceived as
elements within a linguistic continuum and, as such, one should accept the
fact that there must be areas in which fuzziness occurs. The literature has
set two main criteria, fixedness and transparency, by which the four
different lexical combinations are arranged along this continuum :
Table 1. Lexical combinations along the main criteria of the phraseological continu-
um: transparency and fixedness.
In order to work out a practical definition of collocation, we will next

explain the main syntactic and semantic features of this phenomenon,
24 P. Santillan Grimm
whilst comparing it to
ological contimwn.
POLILEXICALITY
There are two basic types of collocations: lexical and grammatical

collocations (Benson et al. 1986: ix). Lexical collocations are combinations
of, at least, two lexemes (1). Additionally, lexical collocations may also
contain a function word, such as a preposition or an article (2).
(1) ihtadama sirď; 3 aqlďat tā'ira; 'arda qatûan; infaģara ģādiban/dāhikan;

tasarraba xabar; ihtazza farahan; }awābid al-kalām; >idāq al-nār; taģyīr
gadariyy; tuhma bātila; tamari fāhiš; ģū sācid; hiwãr sāxin/cāsif; xattata
xutta ; šarďa qânûiy masrah aL-ahdāt...
(2) irtamã fi 3 ahdãn ; istagraqa fi-l-tafkīr; 'axlada 3 ilã al-rãha; 3atã bi-l-
mustatā c; baLīd al-'ihsās; takallal bi-l-naģāh ; taqíl al-hadm; tiqa bi-l-nafs;
hãdd ál-basr; hašd min al-nãs; xďin <ń-ahd ; sahab min al-tadãwul; šāraka
bi-l-lāh...
Grammatical collocations, on the other hand, involve a lexeme and a

preposition (faUaqa caZā, raģabafi), and will not be considered in the present
paper.
LEXICAL RESTRICTIONS
The components of a collocation3 are selected among many other possible

combinations that, on a grammar basis, could also have been chosen to
work as such. In other words, the elements of a collocation attract each
other due not to grammatical rules but to a lexical combinatory preference
imposed by the use of language within a particular community. The
repeated use of combined lexemes over time becomes so frequent that,
eventually, the speakers of that community automatically associate a
lexeme A with another lexeme B.
ARBITRARINESS
The fact that the elements of a collocation are lexically restricted grants
them a primary level of fixedness which is totally arbitrary: there is no
semantic rule that may explain why we say 3 aglabiyya sahiqa instead of
' aglabiyya qatřa or hubb ģamm instead of hvbb hďil. As Emery (1991: 61)
asserts, "collocations are language-specific and hence unpredictable. It is the
3 From now on the term 'collocation' will be used to refer to lexical collocations.
interlingual incongruence which can give rise to sec

difficulties and problems of translation equivalence"
FREQUENT CO-OCCURRENCE
An important quantitative characteristic of collocati
occurrence of their components. Nonetheless, w
granted that all frequent lexical combinations are
may happen that a highly frequent combination
conversely, there are some combinations that, des
cantly frequent from a quantitative approach, they
collocations because of the semantic relationship
elements Cubbahat al-sultãri).
SYNTACTIC SHIFTS
Due to the strong lexical bonds that exist between their elements,
collocations allow their constituents to undergo certain formal modifica-
tions, yet maintaining their lexical value. In this way, we find collocational
series of lexemes, as in: tarawwada ģūccm (verb + nounhāi) - mutarawwid
ģūcan [noun (active participle) + nounhāi] - tarawwada min al-ģūc (verb +
particle + noun). Corpus evidence, however, confirms that not all forms of
a lemma4 hold the same collocational patterns (Sinclair 2004: xix): we say
rafaca macnawiyyãtahu (verb + nounDO) but macnawiyyãtuhu cãliya (noun +
adjective); or xďíbat >amal (noun + noun), but not xďxba >amaliyya (noun
+ adjective).
Apart from varying on the part of the speech level, collocations may
undergo other types of formal modifications, such as: adjectival modifica-
tion ( wadaca al-lamsāt al-'axira ), pronominalization, (saģgala al-lãcib
hadaf > saggalahu ), relativization ( taraha al-sďal alladi kāna fi bāli), the
extraction of one or more components ( ál-quwwãt al-mutacaddida al-
ginsiyyãt > al-mutacaddida)9 etc. In this respect, collocations are closer to
free combinations than to idioms.
HYPOTACTIC RELATIONSHIP
Collocations are combinations of two lexemes that hold different semantic

values: on the one hand, there is the base, which has an autonomous
semiotactic status, and, on the other hand, the collocate, whose meaning is
4 Sinclair defines 'lemma' as "composite sets of word-forms. The lemma of GIVE

has different morphological representations: give, gives, given, gave, giving, and
to give" (1991: 173).
subordinated to the meaning of the base (Hausmann 1989). This

directionality implies that the base selects a specific meaning of the element
it co-occurs with, a phenomenon that Allerton (1982) denominated
semantic tailoring. In this way, the meaning of sďid in hazz sďid should
not be translated as 'happy', but as 'gooď. Moreover, the opposite of hazz
sďid is not hazz hazin , but hazz tacis.
Due to this hypotactic relationship, structures such as noun + wa +
noun ( al-xayr wa-1-šarr ) or verb + wa + verb (tara wa-halaqa) cannot be
considered collocations but rather lexical couplets or binomials (Johnstone
1991).
TRANSPARENCY
Collocations are semantically transparent, which means that the meaning of

the whole equals the sum of the meanings of each of its components. For
this reason, collocations may be easily decoded by the speaker who knows
the meaning of the base and that of the collocate. It must, however, be
clarified that the semantic compositionality of collocations may be partial,
as there are numerous cases in which one of its components acquires a
figurative sense, as in taqil al-dam or dayyaqa sadrahu. Yet, the metaphorical
sense of this kind of collocations does not become as pervasive as in the
case of pure idioms or proverbs, in which philogenetic and/or pragmatic
knowledge of the expression is required in order to interpret the image
compositionally.
SEMANTIC ACCURACY
Collocations entail a considerable level of semantic accuracy, as much as

they capture precise extra linguistic facts. In this sense, collocations ar
created in order to fulfil lexical gaps that have not been fulfilled by on
lexeme. In some cases, an independent lexeme may have a similar meanin
to the one expressed by a collocation, yet the use of one or the other implie
a slightly different connotation; this is the case of verb + nounDo
collocations in which the verb is a 'light verb': qarrara vs. }axada qarārf
sãcada vs. qaddama musďada.
3. Components of collocations
Despite their invaluable contribution to lexical studies and lexicography
classical Arab scholars did not recognize collocation as an independent
linguistic phenomenon (Emery 1991: 63; El-Gemei 2006), and, thus, no
particular term was allotted to this type of multi-word units. It was not unti
the early 60s that Arab scholars began to show interest in collocation,
mainly motivated by the research of the Firthian s

terms have been proposed to refer to collocation ye
has been reached on a unified term to denomin
Probably, the most consolidated term is al-talāzum a
other terms have been or are still used: al-musahaba
kalimãt, al-mutawãridãt al-lafziyyą, al-taģammucāt a
mutawãtira, al-ittibäc , al-tatãbuc, al-tadāmm. From
{l-z-m} is more pertinent than { s-h-b }, as the latt
idea of 'co-occurrence' while the former also refers
restriction'. Moreover, the idea of mutual lexical attraction is better
captured by verbal form VI.
Apart from the base ( nawãt al-talāzum 7) and the collocate [mulāzim
(al-nawõt)], there are several other concepts closely related to the
collocational phenomenon, the most central ones of which will be explained
next.
COLLOCATIONAL SPAN ( madā al-talāzum)

It is the distance between collocates measured in words. Sinclair et al.
(1974: 21) propose an optimum span of -4/ +4, i. e. four character spaces
to the left or to the right of the base. Nonetheless, as Emery (1991: 58
points out, "a major problem in the description of collocations is that the
phenomenon is so diffuse, collocational 'chains' frequently extending over
sentence or even paragraph boundaries". From our point of view, the
collocational span may be useful to detect collocations in large corpora;
however, conclusions based on quantitative results should be contrasted and
complemented by semantic considerations.
COLLOCATIONAL RANGE ( al-q&ima al-talazumiyya)

It is the set of words that hold a similar potential collocational use with the
base. The collocational range often comprises synonymous or near-synon
5 J.R. Firth (1890-1960) is considered one of the pioneers in the field of lexical
studies. His most relevant followers were M.A.K. Haluday, T.F. Mitchell, and
J.McH. Sinclair.
6 This term was first used by El-Hassan (1982; cf. El-Gemei 2006: 435).
7 Most of the Arabic terms in this paper have been translated by the author. cAbd
al-cAz!z (1990), instead, proposes the following terms: collocation: al-musahaba ,
base: mafsil , collocate: musāhib, collocational span: al-masãfa, collocational
range: al-madã , collocational cluster: cunqüd, environment: al-muhit.
ymous words, but i

semantic fields, as no
sollama / haqi
/ wadīca '
/ }amäca
' wazifa
' šahāda j
UPWARD/DOWNWARD COLLOCATION {al-talāzum al-tasãcudiyy/al-

tanãzuliyy)
An upward collocation is a collocation in which the collocate is quan-
titatively more frequent than the base (xatď kabīr), whereas in a downward
collocation the base is more frequent than the collocate (ģāhiz al-caynayrì)8.
According to Sinclair (1991: 116), an "upward collocation, of course, is the
weaker pattern in statistical terms, and the words tend to be elements of
grammatical frames, or superordinates. Downward collocation by contrast
gives us a semantic analysis of a word."
SIMPLE/COMPLEX COLLOCATION (< al-talāzum al-basit/al-murakkab )

Koike (2001: 44) distinguishes between simple and complex collocations.
The former are collocations that involve two or more lexemes (ģinā fähis,
âghasa bi-l-bukď ), while the latter involve a lexeme and an idiomatic
expression [hafiza Can zahr qalb)]. In the taxonomy proposed in this paper
we only take into consideration simple collocations.
CHAINED COLLOCATION ( al-talāzum al-mutasalsal)

They are series of two or more collocations that share a common element,
as in: laciba dawr faccãl ( = laciba dawr + dawr faccāl), or rizrnat >awrãq
mãliyya ( = rizmat >awrāq H- >awrãq mãliyya ).
4. A new taxonomy of collocations in MSA

The classifications of collocations in Arabic that have been proposed so far
pose two major problems. On the one hand, they highly depend on English
lexical studies as a conceptual framework (Bahumaid 2006: 137): Emery's
8 In the examples provided the base is oblique and the collocate bold oblique.
(1991) taxonomy essentially mirrors Cowie's (1981, 1

in Hoogland's (1993) and Hafiz' (2002, 2004) lexico
Benson et al. 's (1986) classification has served as a k
to base their taxonomies. The consequences of re
approach can be misleading, as several crucial aspects
have been overlooked or, at best, mistreated.
On the other hand, classifications of collocations i
to mix different linguistic levels of analysis. This is
work (1993a), in which he blends syntactic, semantic
of collocations (Al-Brashi 2005: 39-42). Hoogland (1993) also combines
syntactic and semantic scales since, in addition to parts of speech, he uses
synonymy and antonymy as categorizing criteria. Furthermore, both
Hoogland and Hafiz (2002, 2004) consider copulative constructions as
collocations, disregarding the hypotactic relationship that there must be
between the base and the collocate.
In the taxonomy presented below, we have considered two principles

that, from our point of view, contribute to the development of a more
Arabic-driven typology of collocations. First, we base on an Arabic grammar
perspective. Second, in order to avoid the overlapping of different linguistic
levels, we have sorted out a three-level classification based exclusively on
syntax (parts of speech and grammatical functions), even though we will
also comment on several crucial lexical and semantic aspects.
Our taxonomy starts out from a macro level that includes four basic
types of collocations: A, B, C, and D. At this level, we exclusively consider
the basic parts of speech in Arabic: verb, noun, and particles. Upon this
preliminary macro level, a first set of subcategories is built, in which certain
grammatical functions and further differentiations of parts of speech are
taken into account: nouaêct, nounDO, nounhāb noun vs. adjective, etc. These
categories have been marked with numbers combined with the macro level
capital letter they belong to (Al, A2, A3...). Finally, this first set of
subcategories branches out into a micro level in which finer information
about certain categories is provided. Because of space limitations, we have
included only the most relevant details, relegating further explanations for
future work. This level has been marked with a capital letter, a number and
a lower-case letter (A2a, A2b, A2c...). Our taxonomy of collocations in MSA
is presented in Table 2.
I i- i i f i i 4 i i i ü
I ||i|ļ:||||jj| ļ i līs
I £ -sí •* ļ līs 1 ïJ
I IjÌfl
■8 ï J f ■8
I I 1 &ï JJ3£f ^-sí
^ ¿ .f£II •*
1 1 i^ JI I|l|lÍH
* » f J f ^ ^ . f I f 1 1 ^ J 1 f I * :|| f
I ■8 Ï ï I J ļ f I i J I : 1 j î & J s 3 1 f 1 ^ 1
I t HMdftílJ fí|í!i!¡|lí
1 t I £ îîîitlÎÎtïîIillflïlîlï
I
•5
IS i
•2
§
o o
c
S'As
S' f ++I +
+Ã As
J
8
Ä + i a o
w q Ç c W W ì
ggs w+ ¡
iff r q I Ç I
>
e -s s -e ii I
< > vt > tí tí
i
0Q oj X) O cá ,£>
s ťN
oS s ťN < < < CO U U
(N <N CO
i
i
«s
W , a- ! <§, I/ / ,- § i a
s a- <§, / § a
a I ! J' a § Í
c
ťN
U
3
0 Iç1 1 ftí
tí C w F i+ J'
+
H
C f a
W "•e-e + ~ł~ -s
W + ~ł~ + X Q X tí tí
<í <D
<j > >
U <u o ^ > còse
o 22 ce
§ c4 co c-i ro •- « ^
Ä<< < U U U QQ
®
.1^!/
1 // ¡ ¡ !/ K' a t = ^
'
si
H ® H
e a3
3 t£
il ++
Ł
u U'-
U'-
U'- 'SÍ <ü
Í is 'S S
ł* ł*©S
4> ss
©sAs
AAo
o
«I >• > a fi
co < mu eś
In keeping with the criteria presented in section

may be classified into four macro categories accord
their components correspond to: A (noun + ver
noun)], C (noun + noun), and D (nouni + part +
further detailed level, collocations may be subdivid
In Al collocations the noun is the subject and the
an action characteristic of the person or thing
(Benson et al. 1986: xxxiii). Verbs are intransitive o
semantic point of view, many are related to nat
actions related to parts of the body. Similarly, ver
duced by animals or objects abound. In addition,
great deal of verbs used in a figurative manner.
Natural phenomena
tnxafada (mansub) al-nahr; bazďa al-faģr ; tabal
talďlďat al-nuģūm ; tanãqasa al-qamar; gayamat/ra
habata al-ģazr ; habbat al-rih ; hayyaga al-bahr ...
Parts of the body

ixtalagat al-cayn ¡ gaccaqa/gaddana/ fatala al-šacr ;
al-cirq ; ixtalaga/wagaba/wagafa al-qalb...
Animal/Object sounds
cawã/zacaqa/sayyaha al-dťb; hamhama/zanxara/
al-casflir ; zamģara al-qitt ; nabaha al-kalb; naqqa/n
al-tawr; nahaqa al-himār; nohama al-fil/wahid al-q
al-šagar ; xarra al-mď; hazama al-racd...
Others
}axada(hu) al-nawm ; >azaqa sadruQiu); ihtadam

macraka ; indahara ál-caduw; iríaqada maglis ; ista
> azma ; tasarraba xabar ; talãqahat al-'afkār ; taka
(didduhu) al-šubha ; xayyama al-hudü'/al-ya's; räw
A2 collocations consist of a transitive verb foll

or a prepositional phraseD0 (A2b). This group of
with group C3, the largest in Arabic. From a semant
deal of verbs denotes either creation-activation or eradication-nullification
(Benson et al.: 1986), though many are the verbs that convey other mea-
nings.
Creation-activation
3 abrama caqd/ittifãq ; 3abr>a dìmmatahu ; ittaxada 3 igrďat ; 3 atara šúkvkahu ;

3asdala al-sitãra ; 3 aťLaqa/fataha al-nār Cala); 3alqã muhãdara/bayân/al-
qabad ; 3 akr ama al-ģār ; 3 alsaqa tuhma ; 3amãt al-litãm ; badala guhd/masãciy;
ballaģa tahiyãt/dacawa...
Eradication-nullification
3abtala sihr/mafūl ; 3abtala/xaraqa qänün ; âxlafa al-ragď ; 3 algā mavťid;

ânkara al-ģamil ; tanã can cazmihi ; ģahada bi4-ģamū/macrūf/nicma ;
ģammada hisäb ; xaffafa al-suřa ; naqada ittifãqiyya ; f arraza ál-sufãf; fadda
igtimď; fasaxa al-caqd/al-tacãqud/al-xutba; qataca al-cilãqãt..
Other
>atã bi-l-mustatãc ; }axada bi-rďy ; >axada calã cãtiqihi ; tabãdala alJarď;

tahammala mas'üliyya ; tahayyana fursa ; taqammasa šaxsiyya ; takabbada
xasďir; garroba hazzahu ; haddada hadaf; hakkama caql; rācā zurūf; rakaba
hawãhu ; taba }ilã rušdihi; fataha bilãd. ..
At this point, we would like to underline the difference between (verb +

part) + noun (A2b) and verb + (part 4- noun) (B) collocations. In the for-
mer type, the verb takes the prepositional phraseDo obligatorily9, whereas in
the latter the prepositional phrase is complementary and has an adverbial
function. Because of this, the collocational span between the node and the
collocate is usually larger in B collocations than in A2b.
Finally, because of its frequent use in Arabic, we have included a third
subcategory2 that consists of verb + nounmutiaq (A2c). In this subtype, the
main function of the cognate accusative is to intensify the action of the
verb, and that is why it is usually translated into English as a verb -I- adverb
construction. Moreover, it is not uncommon that cognate accusatives be
modified by an adjective, turning into chained collocations.
Verb + nounmutiaq(+ adj)

yablã balďan (hasanari); >adraka 3 idrākan (kuliyyan); insahaba insihãban
(kāmilan); ihtamma ihtimāman (bāliģan); hall hallan (gidriyyan); xadďa
xudücan (tāmman); sāhama musāhamatan (faccālatan)...
A3 collocations consist of a verb followed by the circumstantial

accusative structure (hāZ), which is usually expressed by an active participle,
but that could also be a passive participle, an adjective or a masdar (Ryding
9 Bearing in mind that transitivity in Arabic may be expressed directly (verb +

noun) or by means of a particle (verb + part + noun).
2005: 283-4). From a semantic point of view, ha

manner or the intensity in which the action is car
they mostly coincide with English verb + adverb
Verb + nounou
> ahāta cilman ; >ardähu qatìlan ; infaģara ģa&an/
taraban/ farahan; tadawwara ģūcan ; tasabbab
dayfan (bi-/calā); xarra sarřan ; xarra mugšiyan C
B collocations consist of a verb and a preposition

of B collocations overlaps with that of A2b, ev
collocation the prepositional phrase behaves qu
lighted above.
Verb -I- part + noun

>axlada >ilā al-rāha ; irtamã fi 3 ahdān ; istamät fi
hadit/kalām ; istarsala fi-l-hadit ; istagraqa fí-1-b
calã al-xatt ; gahaša/inxarata bi-l-bukď ; ģahadafi
C collocations happen to be a wide-ranging m

because we have adopted the Arabic sense of ťn
from nouns per se, we also associate adjectives to
we move down to the first subcategorical level th
can be appreciated. There are three main C subcat
overlap structurally, and C2 and C3, semantically.
CI collocations are annexation structures Çidãfas

base and noun2 the collocate. Due to its formal and semantic features this
category may sometimes be confused with other multi-word lexical units
and, consequently, over enlarged. The types of >idãfa most frequently in-
volved in collocations are those that express identity, possession, agent,
object, and compositional relationships, and, to a less extent, those that
express contents, and purpose.10
Agent and object 3 idãfa collocations derive from Al and A2 subcategories
respectively. However, masdars should be registered as a noun only when
10 We follow Ryding's typology (2005: 206-211), who classifies 3idãfas into eleven
categories in terms of the semantic relationships between the mudãf and the
mudãf 'ilayhi : identity relationship, possessive relationship, partitive relationship,
agent relationship, object relationship, compositional relationship, measurement
relationship, contents relationship, purpose relationship, quotation or title rela-
tionship, cause relationship.
they have acquired a

especially true from a
tance of saving space
identify what masdar
Agent
>aziz al-rďd/al-tďira ; tď azzurri al-mawqif/al-hāla ; xarir al-mď; xusùf al-
qamar; sarir al-bāb...
Object
3 itLãq al-nčtr; taqrír al-hãla (al-gawwiyyá); tanfid xutta ; tabat al-marāģic ;
nazď al-silāĶ ..
When there is a compositional or contents relationship between nouni

and noun2, >idãfa collocations are lexical variations of D2 collocations
(nouni + min + DEFnoun2):
Compositional
bãqat zúhür ; tawl nahl ; strb samak ; cisābat lusūs ; cunqüd cinab...
Contents
}ustuwānat gāz; barmil zayt/bitrül/naft ; cuìbat sagďir/kibrit ; finģān qahwa/

say...
The most problematic type of CI collocations are those that express

identity and possession relationships and, to a less extent, those that
express a purpose relationship. This is so because they may be easily
confused with 3 idãfa compounds.12 Indeed, both types of combinations
are quite near each other within the phraseological continuum (see Table
1), and thus share a few similarities (polilexicality, arbitrariness,
combinatorial preference); yet, compounds are characterised by having a
higher level of idiomaticity (and, therefore, fixedness) and, above all, by
being multi-word units that refer to a single extra-linguistic entity. In
>idäfa collocations, on the other hand, each member maintains its own
semantic value. Having clarified this, we must admit that fuzziness
11 Hoogland points out that the same principle applies for participles considered
adjectives.
12 Hasan (1975; cf. Emery 1988c: 34) distinguishes two types of compounds: al-
tarkib al-3idãfiyy (m<? ward) and al-tarkib al-wasfiyy (ģāra gawwiyya ). The first
kind may be easily confused with CI collocations, and the second, with C3.
between both constructions occurs quite often

that collocations are also stored in the mind as chunks.
Possession
>arkän aPislām ; (gamř) >asqãc al-cālam ; >amīr al-mwlimîn ; }ãfãq al-bilãd ;

cawāsir y axwa/sadãqa/mahabba ; xãtim alJanbiyď; dahãqin siyãsa ; zucamď
al-qábďil ; masrah alJahdãt; watts al-macrakcL..
Identity
3 amīr alJahlām ; tabāšīr al-sabāh ; habka rìwaya/qissa ; hālat tawčirť ;
hwriyyat al-tďbir ; xatt al-nār ; xutbat al-ģumca ; dayâsi al-layl ; cummahãt al-
kutub; masqat rďs...
Purpose13
bitãqat tahnřa ; tõríx al-istihqãq ; harakat 3 islāh ; dawr al-butuLa; >ummahãt
al-mustaqbaL..
C2 collocations consist of the so-called false }idãfa. This subcategory

shares features with both CI and C3 types: while its grammatical structure
is similar to that of real 3 idãfas , its semantic value may be compared to that
of noun -I- adjective collocations because it is "generally used to express
qualities of 'inalienable possession', that is, qualities that are 'naturally
attributable' to their owners" (Ryding 2005: 221-222).14
False 'idãfa
catìq al-tirāz/al-namat ; >asīl al-rďy ; balīd alJihsãs ; tãqib al-fìkr ; taqíl/xafif
al-dany hāsir al-rďs/al-basr ; xaliyy al-bãl/al-qalb ; xamid al-batan ; xãmil al-
dikr; salit al-lisān ; šadid al-mulāhaza ; munqatř al-nazīr...
C3 collocations are those that comprise a noun followed by a modifying

adjective. In this type of collocation the number of possible semantic
relationships held between the base (the noun) and the collocate (the
adjective) is particularly large. A general classification leads to divide C3
collocations into two major categories: a) where the adjective intensifies,
quantitatively or qualitatively, the meaning of the noun; in turn, this
intensification may be positive or negative; b) where the adjective denotes
an expected attribute of the noun modified. However, many C3 collocations
13 Frequently, identity and purpose 3 idāfa collocations are also expressed by means
of a noun + adjective construction (C3): mďdvbat wadãc or mďdubat wadďiyya/
tawdřiyya ; harakat 3 islāh or haraka }islāhiyya.
14 In fact, C2 and C3 structures are sometimes interchangeable: sanť al-bayãd or
bayãduQiu) sanť.
do not fit into any o

mu'äkis , gundiyy maģh
Quantitative intensif
Positive
J aglabiyya/* aktariyya sShiqa ; tabarruc saxiyy; tahiyya cttra ; tarď fāhiš;

ģumhūr ģafir...
Negative
>amwāl masbûha ; toman baxs ; salām näqis; cām ģahid ; fursa/hāla nādira ;
mablaģ dďíi...
Qualitative intensification
Positive
istiqbãl hãfll ; ' ašģār bãsiqa ; 3 ãfãq wasťa ; 'afkãr baiuíďa ; > âmãl c arida ; 'iman
rãsix; baqara halub; ģuhd ģahid ; hamās multahàb ; himãya muůaqa ; hvbb
gamm...
Negative
ihtilãl ģāšim/ģāsib ; 'isďaťisaba bāliģa ; âmal zďif; 3 amari kãdiba ; bard
qõris ; ģidāl muhtadam ; ģarīma nakrď ; hāģa massa ; hãditfazP ; harb dards/
tāhina/ģašūm ; hazz tacis; xafafãdO l..
Expected quality
yaxdar yānic ; istřmal salim/sahih ; y ašlď mutanãtira ; burhān sātic/qātic; hall/
qarãr hāsim..
It must also be emphasized that the adjective in C3 collocations may also

be expressed by means of an ' idãfa (gayr + adjective), a negative verbal
phrase (lã + verb), or an absolute negation (lã + noun).
Noun + (ģayr + adjective)
ziyčira gayr rasmiyya ; xabar gayr sahih/mď akkad; turuq gayr qänüniyya ;
nusxa gayr ' asliyya ..
Noun + (lã + verb)

ģuz> lã yatagazzď (min); xabar lã yusaddaq; danb lã yugtafar; morad lã
yiťdl..
Noun + (lã + noun)
intisār lã ģubār Calayhi); ittihāmāt lã 3 asās (lahã); tasarruf lā mďxad (fīhi);
muškila lã forar (minhã)...
Similarly to the case of 'idãfa collocations, noun

tend to be confused with adjectival compounds ( a
footnote 11). In general, we may differentiate th
tion of the adjective: in compounds it has a cla
bahriyy > gãdibiyya ginsiyya) whereas in C3 colloc
naturally attributable; yet, once again, ambiguity r
As for simile collocations, which have an 'adject
structure C xafifa ka-1-farāša, rašiq ka-l-xay zara
deal with them in the present paper because they
D collocations consist of a noun! -I- part + nou
comprises two main subgroups: nouni + part +
min + DEFnoun2 (D2). In Dl collocations the nou
bi-l-nafs, sirāc calã sulta), though it may also be ot
fi-1-tafkīr, xďin li-l-cahd), or an adjective (xal
navťihi); noun2 is usually definite but it may o
(i tacallum/taclim can bucd). Dl collocations are no
and the particle may be any harf ģarr (including
connotation from the one in D2 collocations).15
In D2 collocations the noun2 is definite and it is the base of the
collocation. D2 collocations are semantically restricted having two main
functions: they either denote "the larger unit to which a single member
belongs" or "the specific, concrete, small unit of something larger, more
general" (Benson et al. 1986: xxxiii).
Large unit
sirb min al-samak ; huzma min al-hatab ; ratal min al-sayyarãt ; tãqa/bãqat
min al-ward ; cisabat min al-lusûs ; cunqüd min al-cinab/al-karm ; qatř min al-
ganam/al-dťčib/al-xirfan/al-nťcig/al-fila/al-gimal; qurs min aPasbirin;
wabil min al/ šatďim/alJakádib/ al-rasās/ äl-qanäbiL..
Small unit
buqca min al-ard ; guťa min al-mď; xusla min šďr; darra min turãb/ârd ;
züca min al-battix; šaríha/wadra min al-lahm ; qubsa min ál-milh ; qurs min
al-laymwy fass/sinn min al-tawm ; mukaccab min al-sukkar...
As pointed out above, two other collocational structures may be used in

order to express these two semantic functions: an 'idãfa (bãqat ward ; sirb
15 For a monographic study on noun + adjective collocations in Arabic see

Muctasim (2003).
samak, flrq/tawl nah

( husüd caskariyya ; šatt
It should also be unde
the base and the collo
relationship between
draws the presence of
whereas in others the
an extent that it co-ap
is no evident semantic
al-qanäbil
As a final note, we would like to draw attention to the fact that our
taxonomy does not include a category equivalent to English adverb +
adjective collocations (deeply absorbed, strictly accurate). The reason is that
in Arabic the intensification of an adjective has traditionally been expressed
by means other than an adverb: a single lexeme [fagďčin ( = ģucān ģiddari),
wasîm (= ģamil ģiddan); manhūk (= tďban ģiddan)], a comparative structure
Casbar min al-himãr, >asfã min al-mď ), or a simile (xaflf ka-1-farāša, wãdih
wudûh ál-šams ). Adjectives may also be modified by a reduced set of
complements (mainly ģiddan , haqqan , fťlan , and li-1-gãyà); however, the
frequent combinability of these with almost any adjective makes it contra-
dictory to consider them collocations as no lexical restrictions apply.
5. Conclusions and further research
In this paper we have approached the phenomenon of collocation in MSA

from a phraseological perspective, an area which, to date, has mainly
devoted its research to other combinatorial aspects of lexis. Our
contribution has been theoretical and mainly descriptive, its main goal
being to provide a systematic Arabic-driven taxonomy of collocations in
MSA.
Within our taxonomy we have proved that collocations in MSA may be

reduced to four basic syntactic groups upon which more detailed categories
may be devised. The fact that we have based our analysis on an Arabic
grammar perspective has shed some light on particular aspects of
collocations such as the fact that English verb -I- adverb collocations should
be conceived as two different categories in Arabic; that adjective -I- adverb
collocations are not a productive category in Arabic; or that there is a high
degree of lexical correspondence across categories.
As elements of the phraseological continuum , it is advisable to investigate
collocations considering the contact or even overlapping areas of colloca-
tions with other lexical strings. Research topic

collocations from compounds, semantic implica
within (sub-)categories, the role of the article,
structures, and the use of similar roots in both th
might be particularly appealing within the fiel
studies. Moreover, we believe that a closer collab
logy and corpus linguistics would reveal furth
lexical patterning in Arabic.
References
cAbd al-cAz!z, M.H. (1990): Al-Musahaba fi al-Tacbīr al-Luģawiyy. Cairo: Dār

al-Fikr al-cArabiyy.
Abu-Ssaydeh, A.-F. (1989): Towards a Collocational Dictionary. Al-Lisan al -
c Arabiyy , 32: 5-15.
Abu-Ssaydeh, A.-F. (1991a): A Dictionary for professional translators. Babel ,
37(2): 65-74.
Abu-Ssaydeh, A.-F. (1995): An Arabic-English collocational dictionary: Issues
in theory and methodology. Babel , 41(1): 12-23.
Abu-Ssaydeh, A.-F. (2001): Synonymy, collocation and the translator.
Turjuman, 10(2): 53-71.
Abu-Ssaydeh, A.-F. (forthcoming): Al-Marjii. An Arabic-English Dictionary of
Collocations.
Al-Brashi, A.S. (2005): Arabic Collocations: Implications for Translation.

Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Western Sydney, Australia.
Available at: < http://library.uws.edu.au/adt-NUWS/uploads/approved/
adt-NUWS20061 21 5. 1 41 749/public/01 Front.pdf > .
Allerton, D.J. (1982): Valency and the English Verb. London: Academic
Press.
Al-Rawi, S. (2001): Rendering Arabic collocations into English. Al-Lisan al-

c Arabiyy, 52: 23-27.
Bahumaid, Sh. (2006): Collocation in English-Arabic translation. Babel, 52(2):
133-152.
Benson, M., Benson, E. and Ilson, R.F. (1986; 2nd edition revised 1997): Th
BBI Combinatory Dictionary of English: A Guide to Word Combination
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Cowie, A.P. (1981): The treatment of collocations and idioms in learner's
dictionaries. Applied Linguistics , 11(3): 223-235.
Cowie, A.P., Mackin

Current Idiomatic En
El-Gemei, D. (2006): C
of Arabic Language a
El-Hasan, Sh. (1982):
cUWm al-Insãniyya ,
Emery, P.G. (1988): C
für Arabische Linguist
Emery, P.G (1991): C
Arabische Linguistik/J
Ghariani, M. (2007):
ology . An Internatio
758. Berlin: Walter d
Ghazala, H. (1993a): Tarģamat al-mutalazimāt al-lafziyya: carabiyy-
5inģlīziyy. Al-ģuz5 1. Turjuman 2(1): 7-44.
Ghazala, H. (1993b): Tarģamat al-mutalazimat al-lafziyya: carabiyy-
5inģlīziyy. Al-ģuz5 II. Turjuman 2(2): 1-33.
Hafiz, Al.-T. (2002): Arabic collocations: The need for an Arabic
combinatory dictionary. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies , 3:
95-104.
Hafiz, Al.-T. (2004): Al-Hafiz Dictionary of Arabic Collocations (Arab

English). Beirut: Librarie du Liban.
Hasan, cA. (1975): Al-Nahw al-Wāfiyy. Cairo: Dar al-Macarif.
Hausmann, F. J. (1989): Le dictionnaire de collocations. In: Hausmann, F.J.
al. (eds.): Wörterbücher. Dictionaries . Dictionnaires . Ein Internationales
Handbuch zur Lexicographie. An International Encyclopedia of Lexi
graphy /Encyclopédie Internationale de Lexicographie , vol. 1: 1010-1019
Berlin/New York: Walter De Gruyter.
Heliel, M.M.H. (1989): Al-mutalazimat al-lafziyya wa-l-targama. FIT
Newsletter , 11(3): 31-44.
Heliel, M.M.H. (1994): Mucgam al-mutalazimat al-lafziyya: xatwa nahw al-
nuhūd bi-1-tarģama. Turjuman , 3(1): 35-59.
Hoogland, J. (1993): Collocation in Arabic (MSA) and the Treatment of
Collocations in Arabic Dictionaries. In: Dévényi, K. et al. (eds.): Proceed-
ings of the Colloquium on Arabic Lexicology and Lexicography, 75-93.
Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University & Csoma de Koros Society. Also
available at: <www.let.kun.n1/WBA/content2/l. 8.1_Collocation.htm >
Johnstone, B. (1991): Repetition in Arabic Disco

delphia: John Benjamins.
Koike, K. (2001): Colocaciones Léxicas en el Españ
y Léxico-Semántico. University of Alcalá and Tak
Moon, R. (1998): Fixed Expressions and Idioms in
Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Muctasim, M. (2003): FI sabīl mucģam carabiyy li-m
sifa. In: Proceedings of the International Cong
cArabiyyœ al-Wāqic wa-lJĀfāq. Hasan II Univ
Casablanca, Morocco.
Ryding, K.C. (2005): A Reference Grammar of Modern Standard Arabic.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shakir, A. and Farghal, M. (1992): Collocations as an index of L2 com-
petence in Arabic-English simultaneous interpreting and translation. FIT
Newsletter , 11(3): 227-245.
Sinclair, J.McH. (1991): Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Sinclair, J.McH. (Krishnamurthy, R. ed.) (2004): English Collocation Studies:
The OSTI Report London/New York: Continuum.
Sinclair, J.McH. and Jones, S. (1974): English lexical collocations: A study in
computational linguistics. Cahiers de Lexicologie, 24(1): 15-61.
Zuluaga, A. (2002): Los 'enlaces frecuentes' de María Moliner: Observa-
ciones sobre las llamadas colocaciones. Lingüística Española Actual, 24(1):
97-114.
We have also made an extensive use of the Arabic Corpus online availa
at: < http://arabicorpus.byu.edu/ > .

Collocation in Modern Standard Arabic

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Collocation in Modern Standard Arabic

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Collocation in Modern Standard Arabic revisited

Author(s): Paula Santillán Grimm

Paula Santillan Grimm1

1 Department of Semitic Studies, University of Granada, Spain.

bearing in mind two basic goals: first, describin

2. What a collocation is and what it is not

For some linguists, collocations have become a highly controversial phen-

In order to work out a practical definition of collocation, we will next

There are two basic types of collocations: lexical and grammatical

(1) ihtadama sirď; 3 aqlďat tā'ira; 'arda qatûan; infaģara ģādiban/dāhikan;

Grammatical collocations, on the other hand, involve a lexeme and a

The components of a collocation3 are selected among many other possible

interlingual incongruence which can give rise to sec

Collocations are combinations of two lexemes that hold different semantic

4 Sinclair defines 'lemma' as "composite sets of word-forms. The lemma of GIVE

subordinated to the meaning of the base (Hausmann 1989). This

Collocations are semantically transparent, which means that the meaning of

Collocations entail a considerable level of semantic accuracy, as much as

mainly motivated by the research of the Firthian s

COLLOCATIONAL SPAN ( madā al-talāzum)

COLLOCATIONAL RANGE ( al-q&ima al-talazumiyya)

ymous words, but i

UPWARD/DOWNWARD COLLOCATION {al-talāzum al-tasãcudiyy/al-

SIMPLE/COMPLEX COLLOCATION (< al-talāzum al-basit/al-murakkab )

CHAINED COLLOCATION ( al-talāzum al-mutasalsal)

4. A new taxonomy of collocations in MSA

(1991) taxonomy essentially mirrors Cowie's (1981, 1

In the taxonomy presented below, we have considered two principles

In keeping with the criteria presented in section

Parts of the body

}axada(hu) al-nawm ; >azaqa sadruQiu); ihtadam

A2 collocations consist of a transitive verb foll

3 abrama caqd/ittifãq ; 3abr>a dìmmatahu ; ittaxada 3 igrďat ; 3 atara šúkvkahu ;

3abtala sihr/mafūl ; 3abtala/xaraqa qänün ; ^axlafa al-ragď ; 3 algā mavťid;

>atã bi-l-mustatãc ; }axada bi-rďy ; >axada calã cãtiqihi ; tabãdala alJarď;

At this point, we would like to underline the difference between (verb +

Verb + nounmutiaq(+ adj)

A3 collocations consist of a verb followed by the circumstantial

9 Bearing in mind that transitivity in Arabic may be expressed directly (verb +

2005: 283-4). From a semantic point of view, ha

B collocations consist of a verb and a preposition

Verb -I- part + noun

C collocations happen to be a wide-ranging m

CI collocations are annexation structures Çidãfas

they have acquired a

When there is a compositional or contents relationship between nouni

}ustuwānat gāz; barmil zayt/bitrül/naft ; cuìbat sagďir/kibrit ; finģān qahwa/

The most problematic type of CI collocations are those that express

between both constructions occurs quite often

>arkän aPislām ; (gamř) >asqãc al-cālam ; >amīr al-mwlimîn ; }ãfãq al-bilãd ;

C2 collocations consist of the so-called false }idãfa. This subcategory

C3 collocations are those that comprise a noun followed by a modifying

do not fit into any o

J aglabiyya/* aktariyya sShiqa ; tabarruc saxiyy; tahiyya cttra ; tarď fāhiš;

It must also be emphasized that the adjective in C3 collocations may also

Noun + (lã + verb)

Similarly to the case of 'idãfa collocations, noun

As pointed out above, two other collocational structures may be used in

15 For a monographic study on noun + adjective collocations in Arabic see

samak, flrq/tawl nah

5. Conclusions and further research

In this paper we have approached the phenomenon of collocation in MSA

Within our taxonomy we have proved that collocations in MSA may be